It's not stable, in that it's not 1.0, it's not easy to fix, and it's not worth the effort to fix it, because we've been trying to fix it for 3 years. Better to put the effort into 0.7.
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 02:07:55PM +0000, Gordan Bobic wrote: > What is the point in having a "stable" release with such a fundamental > problem? > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > >It is well established that there is a problem with 0.5 routing. What > >relevance does this have to anything? > > > >On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 09:30:01AM +0000, Gordan Bobic wrote: > > > >>Ian Clarke wrote: > >> > >>>On 30/11/05, Gordan Bobic <gordan at bobich.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Matthew Toseland wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Umm, please read the presentation on 0.7. Specializations are simply > >>>>>fixed numbers in 0.7. The problem with probabilistic caching according > >>>>>to specialization is that we need to deal with both very small networks > >>>>>and very large networks. How do we sort this out? > >>>> > >>>>It's quite simple - on smaller networks, the specialisation of the node > >>>>will be wider. You use a mean and standard deviation of the current > >>>>store distribution. If the standard deviation is large, you make it more > >>>>likely to cache things further away. > >>> > >>> > >>>You are proposing a fix to a problem before we have even determined > >>>whether a problem exists. I am not currently aware of any evidence > >>>that simple LRU provides inadequate specialization, or that we need to > >>>enforce specialization in this way. > >>> > >>>In other words: If its not broken, don't fix it (words every software > >>>engineer should live by). > >> > >>Having just put two nodes up, one with unlimited bandwidth (well, > >>100Mb/s) one with less, and seeing both of them sit at the maximum > >>bandwidth set or maximum CPU usage, whichever runs out first, tells me > >>that there likely is a problem. > >> > >>It seems obvious to me that without specialisation there can be no > >>routing other than random/flooding - and I am not seeing particularly > >>pronounced specialisation. The only reason it _seems_ to work is because > >>popular content gets caches on most nodes. > >> > >>Gordan > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > Tech at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20051201/d143e50f/attachment.pgp>
